Two-year extension for Jaylen Warren

agreed

Harris was not highly valued by 31 other teams.

of those teams, maybe a dozen were seeking a top RB. He was not seen as a highly sought FA.

Most of us know that.

again, for me - nothing personal against the kid - he gave it all he had in a HORRIBLE Tomlin led offense. I did not like the pick the day that it happened. We needed to begin rebuilding the OLINE in THAT draft, but we delayed. that was not Najee's fault. that was Tom-bert's fault....

I wish Najee the best.

 

How is that logic any better than "We like Warren better, but we are going to start Harris, give him more snaps and more touches," which is the narrative some folks are trying to push here. It isn't. This idea that the team liked Warren better but kept playing Harris more and giving him the ball more is just ludicrous.

It seems that, like many posters here, you aren't evaluating Harris for what he was. You are grading on a curve, rating Warren as better than he is because he was an UDFA and rating Harris as worse than he is because he was a first-round draft pick.

My logic works better when you reflect it accurately, which you failed to do.

This would be more accurate: "We will let the better player go because the other guy is also very good and he is cheaper, less vocal, younger, and has less wear and tear on his body."

 

It is a you problem that you don't understand that draft status isn't that big of an issue when the draft was four years earlier and with a different GM in charge. It would be one thing if that had been a year or two after Harris was taken in the first round, but this was his fourth season and the team had already chosen not to exercise the fifth-year option on him, so clearly draft status was not the reason Harris got the ball more last season. That is just a reach to explain something that doesn't fit your argument.

That is as far as I will follow you down the path of posting in a manner that is disrespectful to the other poster. I have been directed to post more respectfully and am trying to do so, but it is easier when everyone plays by those rules. I am treating this like a difference of opinion, not a personal beef. I hope you can do the same. Just because my opinion is different from yours does not mean I don't understand the elements at play.

We are framing this argument differently. As I already posted, I am not the one who brought the previous discussion of which back is better into this thread, but it was raised and that is what I am addressing. The Steelers clearly thought Harris was the better back last season, the one who gave them the best chance to win. He didn't just get more snaps and more touches overall and early on when Warren was hurt. He remained the feature back all season long. If you think that was due to injury, why do you keep dismissing concerns about Warren staying healthy? If you think he got the ball less because he wasn't healthy all season, isn't that a concern?

 

Now you are trying to compare the only back in the NFL to rush four 1,000 yards each of the last four seasons to Limas Sweed, Dri Archer, and Green. (I assume you meant Kendrick Green, not Joe Greene.) Interesting tactic, if a bit silly.

When the better player is more costly, older, and is a running back with a lot less tread left on the tires, that decision makes more sense, but you continue to omit those details.

Would this be a good time to once again remind you that I don't think they should have chosen one or the other. I thought they should have kept both. I want Warren in the role he has played the last two seasons, where we know he excels.

 

So you are going to continue to ignore that Warren is younger and has far less wear and tear on his body, both of which are huge factors for running backs. Got it.

 

EXCUSE ME
PARDON ME
JUST WANTED TO DROP THIS HERE.

Like I said, the Steelers did a good job selling a story and quite a few folks here were suckered into believing it!

SUCH A LOVELY CENTERPIECE FOR THIS
ROUND TABLE OF DISCUSSION
ROUND AND ROUND AND ROUND AND ROUND



Kenny Pickett ran harder than Najee!!

 

I'm arguing who they thought was a better player, not who they liked better. There is a difference. That is where things like age, wear and tear, and attitude come into play. To say that wear and tear is inconsequential is disingenuous or shows a complete lack of understanding. I assume it is the former.

It comes down to a simple fact. Even when Warren was healthy, Harris started. Harris got more snaps. Harris got the ball more. Your excuse of Harris being a former first-round pick does not hold up. This wasn't a year or two after he was taken that high. It was four years later. Also, the GM who chose him was gone. Keep in mind that the team had already moved on from the player taken in the first round the year after Harris, Pickett, and they had already passed on his fifth-year option. Those things tell us they weren't so worried about draft capital spent to start the lesser back.

The injury excuse doesn't work, either. Warren wasn't hurt all season.

Given that the draft capital argument does not hold up and the injury excuse doesn't hold up, why would the Steelers continue with Harris as the feature back and continue to give him the most work if they thought Warren was better. The answer is simple. They wouldn't.

 

FMR

this thread is gonna have a 2 year extension

 

The discussion is much older than the thread.

 

You must be really bored to do this

 

We both are. Can't you tell?

 

They started the player they think is better. They gave him more snaps. They gave him more touches. End of story. The rest is just noise.

 

You can tell that I spend my days teaching rhetoric becuase I keep finding different ways to use your words against you in the hopes that logic and reason will set in.

 

My logic works better when you don't intentionally misrepresent it, which is what you just did. I have explained it to you many times, so I know you know better.

My argument is they kept the cheaper, younger, less vocal back with far less wear and tear on his body when they should have kept both. Sunday was fantastic evidence for my case. The Steelers don't have a power back, or at least they won't until they start to trust Johnson. Warren's touches were similar to what he got in the past, which left them wasting far too many opportunities on Gainwell. If Sunday is any indication, the only way letting Harris go doesn't turn out to be a huge mistake is if Johnson pans out. Your claims that Warren can do more certainly didn't show up against the Jets.

Your argument is that they started the back they liked less, gave him more snaps and more touches all of last season even when Warren was healthy. Now that is a failure of logic.

 

No, I want you to accurately reflect my argument when you bring it up, which you keep refusing to do. You did it again in this post, ignoring relevant information because it doesn't fit into your version of the story. Harris has a lot more wear and tear on him after getting the ball so much the last four years. He is vocal in a way the team may not like. He is a year older. You know football well enough to know those things are relevant, so please stop acting as if I'm bringing up reasons that don't make sense. You know better.

Harris missed most of the preseason with an eye injury, so it is no surprise he didn't play much in the opener. You know this. You harped on it as justification for your argument that they were right to pass on his option, as if it was guaranteed that he would suffer a fluky injury no matter what course his life took. You abandoned that argument once it became clear he would be ready to play in the opener.

What the Steelers should have done was keep both. Instead, they were stuck wasting all those snaps and touches on Gainwell yesterday. That easily could have cost them the game.

 

Perhaps Omar should have talked to Arthur Smith before extending Warren. based non Warrens usage last year and yesterday he does not seem to Smith’s preferred choice at RB and I am not sure why.